The last time the latter was mooted just about every archaeological and heritage organisation except English Heritage opposed it yet it almost went ahead regardless and was only cancelled when the world plunged into a financial crisis. Now the economy has improved, the pressure to sort out the congestion has built up once again and, by various accounts, technology has made tunnelling much cheaper. The Government is giving out strong signals it’s going to do something major and English Heritage has been expressing enthusiasm for “a tunnel” but our attempts to get them to say which tunnel they were thinking of when they said they were fighting for one (including via a Freedom of Information request) have been unsuccessful.

Something like this? It’s not the tunnel that matters but where the approach roads are built

It’s to be hoped that The National Trust, which was strongly opposed to the previous short tunnel would be equally opposed to any new proposal for one. Unfortunately they are yet to say so. Instead, there’s this:

“Like many we recognise there are real problems at Stonehenge and we have for many years supported the principle of improving the road network in order to improve the road and the quality of the environment across the Stonehenge Landscape. Some people are insisting change is needed to ease congestion levels no matter what the impact on the landscape. At the Trust we believe that the current round of road improvements might provide an opportunity to finally give Stonehenge the scheme it deserves and that means a world class solution for a world class place. We will be engaging very closely with the Government and our key partners over the next year to ensure we help to protect this very special place.”

Let’s hope they’ll say what they really think very soon, i.e. that their view hasn’t changed, and can’t: a short tunnel at Stonehenge is still unacceptable. The fact they say Stonehenge deserves “a world class solution” pretty much telegraphs what they think already. Hooray for them! You’d rather be in a position where you’re defending that assertion than be a hapless English Heritage press officer chewing their pencil over how to phrase “we support the Government’s wish to impose a damaging solution”!

4 comments

No tunnel no how. Disgusting idea, for many years the sight of Stonehenge has been a feature of a journey to or from the West Country and is part of our national life. Take away the barriers from the stones, stop the land train and fulfill the promise of a “natural”Neolithic surround to Stonehenge before trashing what is now part of our “culture”.

If you are prepared to admit that all the archaeology under the present A303 is gone, then a lot of the justification for a tunnel vanishes. All you actually want is for the road and its traffic not to be visible from the Stonehenge landscape; you do not actually need a tunnel at all.

What you want is a canyon, an artificial straight-sided trench into which you put the roadbed so that it is low enough that the tops of vehicles are not visible. You would also want grassed-over hard standing along both sides of this canyon, so that you can get heavy machinery to any part of the canyon lip if you need to.

The advantages here are many; no tunnel roof means ventilation systems aren’t needed. Fire control systems can be much less expensive (effectively just water points and sprinklers along the length of the thing), and the construction costs are much lower.